Hi Jagan,
On 06 December 2016 17:24 Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Phil Edworthy
> wrote:
> > Hi Jagan, Marek,
> >
> > On 06 December 2016 12:39 Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> On 12/06/2016 11:25 AM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> >> > On 05 December 2016 13:31, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> >> O
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> Hi Jagan, Marek,
>
> On 06 December 2016 12:39 Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 12/06/2016 11:25 AM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
>> > On 05 December 2016 13:31, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> >> On 12/05/2016 11:46 AM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
>> >>> On 05 December 2016
Hi Jagan, Marek,
On 06 December 2016 12:39 Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 12/06/2016 11:25 AM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> > On 05 December 2016 13:31, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> On 12/05/2016 11:46 AM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> >>> On 05 December 2016 10:42, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:31 AM
On 12/06/2016 11:25 AM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> Hi Marek,
>
> On 05 December 2016 13:31, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 12/05/2016 11:46 AM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
>>> On 05 December 2016 10:42, Jagan Teki wrote:
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Phil Edworthy
wrote:
> On 05 December 2016 10:
Hi Marek,
On 05 December 2016 13:31, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 12/05/2016 11:46 AM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> > On 05 December 2016 10:42, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Phil Edworthy
> >> wrote:
> >>> On 05 December 2016 10:26, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at
On 12/05/2016 11:46 AM, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> On 05 December 2016 10:42, Jagan Teki wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Phil Edworthy
>> wrote:
>>> HI Jagan,
>>>
>>> On 05 December 2016 10:26, Jagan Teki wrote:
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Phil Edworthy
wrote:
Hi Jagan,
On 05 December 2016 10:42, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Phil Edworthy
> wrote:
> > HI Jagan,
> >
> > On 05 December 2016 10:26, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Phil Edworthy
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Jagan,
> >> >
> >> > On 02 December 2016 1
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Phil Edworthy
wrote:
> HI Jagan,
>
> On 05 December 2016 10:26, Jagan Teki wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Phil Edworthy
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Jagan,
>> >
>> > On 02 December 2016 14:23, Jagan Teki wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 6:28 PM, Phil Edworthy
HI Jagan,
On 05 December 2016 10:26, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Phil Edworthy
> wrote:
> > Hi Jagan,
> >
> > On 02 December 2016 14:23, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 6:28 PM, Phil Edworthy
> >> wrote:
> >> > Introduce a new DT property to specify whethe
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Phil Edworthy
wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> On 02 December 2016 14:23, Jagan Teki wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 6:28 PM, Phil Edworthy
>> wrote:
>> > Introduce a new DT property to specify whether the QSPI Controller
>> > samples the data on a rising edge. The defaul
Hi Jagan,
On 02 December 2016 14:23, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 6:28 PM, Phil Edworthy
> wrote:
> > Introduce a new DT property to specify whether the QSPI Controller
> > samples the data on a rising edge. The default is falling edge.
> > Some versions of the QSPI Controller do n
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 6:28 PM, Phil Edworthy
wrote:
> Introduce a new DT property to specify whether the QSPI Controller
> samples the data on a rising edge. The default is falling edge.
> Some versions of the QSPI Controller do not implement this bit, in
> which case the property should be omit
Introduce a new DT property to specify whether the QSPI Controller
samples the data on a rising edge. The default is falling edge.
Some versions of the QSPI Controller do not implement this bit, in
which case the property should be omitted.
Signed-off-by: Phil Edworthy
---
v3:
- Patch split so
13 matches
Mail list logo